Rabbi Shlomo Ibn Gabirol describes the process of repentance as escaping and fleeing from God to God. When we realize the weight of God’s judgment and the evil of sin we recognize that we need to escape. But there is only one place to run and that is to take shelter in God Himself. And God promises to protect and preserve those who trust in Him and only in Him (Nahum 1:7; Psalm 18:31).

Trusting in God means trusting in no one and in nothing else. Not in our works, not in our merits, not in our strength or wealth, not in the blood of any sacrifice and certainly not in the works of someone who claimed to be sinless. God told Moses that he will have compassion on whom He will have compassion (Exodus 33:19). If someone looks to God and to God alone for compassion then that is where God’s compassion will be found. If someone looks elsewhere for compassion – such as to the claims of a “perfect sacrifice” or to the works of a person who walked God’s earth and breathed God’s air like you or me – then God will tell you to go to that person to find your compassion. And anyone who breathed God’s air is just as needy for God’s compassion as you are (Isaiah 2:22).

In this spirit and as part of Eternal Israel’s worship we address God with the following words in the Yom Kippur liturgy:

“We are Your nation and You are our God.

We are Your children and You are our Father.

We are Your servants and You are our Master.

We are Your congregation and You are our portion.

We are Your inheritance and You are our lot.

We are Your sheep and You are our Shepherd.

We are Your vineyard and You are our Keeper.

We are Your handiwork and You are our Creator.

We are Your spouse and You are our Beloved.

We are Your treasure and You are our God.

We are Your nation and You are our King.

We are Your distinguished ones and You are our Distinction.

We are brazen-faced and You are merciful and gracious.

We are stiff-necked and You are slow to anger.

We are filled with iniquity and You are filled with compassion.

We – our days are like a fleeting shadow and Your years will never end.”

If you found this article helpful please consider making a donation to Judaism Resources by clicking on the link below.

140 Responses to Trust and Repentance

Does repentance truly make “the evil” holy? Does the lack of repentance make “the good” evil?

Consider the Ninevites living at the time of Jonah the prophet.

Did their repentance make them a “holy” people unto the L-RD?

No– but repentance did stay the L-RD’s hand from executing His death sentence against them.
___________________________

Hezekiah and the people repented at the preaching of Micah of Moresheth and the land was spared from the L-RD’s judgment of death and destruction– however, like the Ninevites, their repentance did not make them “holy”.

And what if Ezekiel began to do evil?

The L-RD would have executed Ezekiel despite all his righteousness– but would Ezekiel be “unholy” in the Olam Haba?
___________________________

When the L-RD decides to bring the sword upon a land, Elohim offers the mercy of repentance to both Jew and Gentile to ward off His temporal judgment on earth– but the repentance found in Ezekiel 3/18/33 has nothing to do with the eternal judgment.

If we were to visit Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai at his deathbed, we would find out that the modern Rabbinic interpretation of “repentance” is meaningless and offers no hope for eternal life. [Berakoth 28b]

KAVI Where is David? how about Abraham Isaac and Jacob? It is Christianity that believes that a man kept the commandments perfectly and your whole hope is based on the activities of a man who caused more bloodshed than any other man in history. By the way – Adam and Eve violated 100% of the commandments that they were given

the belief seems to be that only a flesh god in the form of a human can obey his own commands which he wrote for himself before he became flesh. if you are not a god, then it is better for you to sit down and celebrate blood atonement and revival of dead body.
the beliefs seems to be that human is diseased , ungodly and evil and can never have direct conversation with a kind and loving god because he is drowning in our sins and they are too heavy for him .

replace adam with the flesh god and the flesh god worshippers would say
that their god jesus would never eat from the tree even if he were tempted too

but adam comes from no parents and he never had “stain of original sin”
so why is this biased god loves divinising “jesus flesh” but not adams?

Rabbi,
Isn’t Tanakh very explicit that Abram and David did NOT follow all the commands?

Yet, Tanakh just as explicitly says they did obey the commands?

Such massive discrepancies can be adequately resolved by understanding that G-d purposed redemption through Faith in His Promised Redeemer [Genesis 3]– this “Law” of Faith laid out from the Beginning leaves the flesh to corruption but makes holy the soul of the inner man to eternal life.

For Abram,
[] First came righteousness by Faith
[] Second came acceptable “good deeds” / obedience to the commands
** Genesis 15 and 26

Likewise, for David,
[] First came righteousness by Faith
[] Second came acceptable obedience to the commands and acceptable repentance
**Psalm 32 and 1 Kings 14

“Good” works and repentance become acceptable to G-d from a cleansed soul made holy through Faith in the Promised Redeemer.

KAVI The discrepancy can be more easily resolved when we realize that God does NOT expect perfection and that He accepts repentance – both concepts clearly articulated in Tanach Psalm 103:14, Psalm 51:19

isn’t the whole point of a god dying for you because you can’t sincerely feel regret and remorse about your wrong doing? if you can, then so can millions of humans without the need to hear that jesus was punished for you.

but if you feel regret and remorse, is it because what you done to your victim or how you imagined your god was sacrificed? but jesus is now in the depth of heaven enjoying happiness. so i guess it is the victim who is important here and not jesus.

do you go to your victim and say that your sins were already punished on jesus?

the question is
does your victim bring you to repentance or a sacrificed god who died just for a few days by pouring his own wrath on himself?

Rabbi,
Theoretically, if G-d could lower His standard, I can see what you are saying could be true– but at what practical point under the Law does a person reach a state where G-d will not impute sin? [Psalm 32]

If G-od did not expect perfection– wouldn’t Adam and Chava still be alive and dwelling in Gan Eden?

KAVI The answer to your first question is Ezekiel 33:16 and the answer to your second question is that God decides what to expect from each of His creations and He doesn’t expect humans to be perfect – if you noticed Adam and Eve violated 100% of the commandments that they were entrusted with 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >

KAVI and CP The two ways to understand Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakai’s self-doubt are as follows – #1 He heart was with God more than you could imagine – but he realized that God judges not only our heart but our actions as well – and not only our actions but the ramifications fo our actions – not only the ramifications that took place in our lifetime but also those which surface generations later – and that frightened him – where does this put Jesus? #2 – His heart was with God more than you could imagine – he was however aware of man’s almost unlimited possibility of self-deception – here is a question for you people – I am sure both of you agree that those who hated and persecuted Jews were not “real” Christians” – so how many of them went to their deaths completely confident that they are “saved”?

Rav B wrote:
“KAVI The discrepancy can be more easily resolved when we realize that God does NOT expect perfection and that He accepts repentance – both concepts clearly articulated in Tanach Psalm 103:14, Psalm 51:19”

And ironically, Rabbi, that is exactly what Christians REALLY believe when they are not trying to convert people, but living their life in a cycle of sin and repentance. How many times have we seen the bumper sticker that reads, “Christians are not Perfect, just Forgiven”?

This is the catch-22 they face. If God can forgive and welcome an imperfect person, then what is the need for Jesus? On the other hand, if they are still sinning even after accepting Jesus (and ALL of them are, by their own admission), then on what basis are they fit for God’s presence, if sinless perfection is the qualifying criteria? Think about this: if it is about “the blood of Jesus” and “Jesus dying for our sins”, then there is no need for repentance or even right-doing, since God does not consider your sin, but Jesus’ supposed perfection in your place.

That is why Hebrews chapters 8-10 exposes the fatal flaw of Christian doctrine and the NT. No reason to even bother with the rest of the arguments. Christianity is self-defeating on its most basic premise.

Ribaz knew the story of Adam/Chava– and it’s not difficult to see why he came to understand on his deathbed that all his works and repentance were meaningless “fig leaves” when facing the imminent presence of a supremely HOLY ELOHIM.

Elohim in mercy gives mankind two options to holiness,
[] Accept His redemption by faith in Mashiach [eat from the “Tree of Life”]
[] Reject His redemption by faith in Mashiach [eat from the “Forbidden Tree”]

god made an easy to reach tree
god put desire in man
god would give “new covenant” in which christians would tell other christians to do away with all commandments of yhwh
when christians are asked today , “why do you eat pork”
they say , “what is the big deal”
so i guess you need to ask why your god judged them as evil if they didn’t even know the experience of wrong and right?

What always bothered me about the Genesis story from the point of view of theodicy is that whether we are talking the Tanakh or Christian “old testament,” a problem exists in that Adam and Eve have no earthly concept of death or decay at least not that the text mentions, so they can’t understand what the penalty truly means.

Never does Adam ask, “Hey G-d what does death mean that I may understand the nature of the severity of transgressing your mitzvah.” And if Adam did understand the severity, a theologian bears the burden of explaining why Adam would bring such a disastrous punishment on not only himself, but on all of his future descendants.

So, when G-d says, “you shall die,” these new creations actually have no frame of reference within which to comprehend the punishment should they transgress G-d’s decree. That appears to be a huge problem.

The Christian explanation is silly, but it has the emotional benefit of the idea that G-d and sin simply cannot coexist on the same plane, so such a sin (though it appears minor,) actually had cosmic consequences, and for the Christian at east, G-d “solved” the problem before it even began with JC, or allegedly he did.

The G-d of Israel says, “Will you really annul My judgment? Will you condemn Me that you may be justified?” [Job 40]

____________________________

“And the L-rd G-d commanded man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat. But of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat of it, for on the day that you eat thereof, you shall surely die.” [Genesis 2]

Isn’t it “right” to obey G-d and “wrong” to disobey regardless of whether we deem it a small matter or great one?

Likewise, does it matter if we disobey 1 or 613+ commands?

Yes, to the HOLY Elohim, even the least single sin matters.
____________________________

So, if we cannot do anything to obey 1 command let alone 613+, how is the Law of Moses “good”?

The Law of Moses becomes “good” when we Repent of believing we’re capable of fulfilling it.

The Law of Moses is “good” because it leads us toward our only hope of holiness through Faith in the Promised Redeemer.

Moses not only wrote the story of Adam/Chava and of the Promised Redeemer– Moses also obeyed Elohim and followed the Way of Faith in Mashiach to obtain a perfect righteousness.

The fig tree not having fruit was symbolic of the religious system at the time not bearing the fruit God wanted. It had nothing to do with the fig tree as it was the wrong time for fruit.

As the fig tree shriveled up and died so did the State of Israel shortly after. However, Yeshua said the generation that sees the fig tree bud will not pass away until Messiah comes. If the budding was 1948 or 1968 it still puts the fulfillment incredibly close. Then it will be time for fruit!

“The fig tree not having fruit was symbolic of the religious system at the time not bearing the fruit God wanted. It had nothing to do with the fig tree as it was the wrong time for fruit.

As the fig tree shriveled up and died so did the State of Israel shortly after. However, Yeshua said the generation that sees the fig tree bud will not pass away until Messiah comes. If the budding was 1948 or 1968 it still puts the fulfillment incredibly close. Then it will be time for fruit!”

quote:
12The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. 13Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. 14Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.” And his disciples heard him say it.

20In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. 21Peter remembered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!”

does it make sense that israel should be bearing fruit in the wrong season?
why does matthew put special effect on this story and quicken the withering?

(Matthew 24)
“But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

“And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory.

“And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.

“Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near;

so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.

“Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

⚓️ To answer what you asked:
(I think) the reason for no fruit was to indicate Israel will bear fruit in season (at the proper time). But first a message of forgiveness must go out to the lost tribes and Gentiles which would not happen unless Israel was dispersed among the nations. I’d say Matthew quickened it to show how soon Israel would be destroyed.

The times of the Gentiles is coming to a end and Israel will emerge in the place of preeminence but not before some serious trouble.

“Later that night on the mount of Olives this conversation took place:

(Matthew 24)
“But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

“And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory.

“And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.

“Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near;

so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.

“Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

⚓️ To answer what you asked:
(I think) the reason for no fruit was to indicate Israel will bear fruit in season (at the proper time). But first a message of forgiveness must go out to the lost tribes and Gentiles which would not happen unless Israel was dispersed among the nations. I’d say Matthew quickened it to show how soon Israel would be destroyed.

The times of the Gentiles is coming to a end and Israel will emerge in the place of preeminence but not before some serious trouble.”

“The times of the Gentiles is coming to a end and Israel will emerge in the place of preeminence but not before some serious trouble.”

when i read the gospel of mark, i see that jesus tells the refugees to flee and then he will come back to rescue them in their life time. this jesus guy is using language his contemporaries were using .
in second century church fathers don’t seem to be dreaming about restoration of israel, or am i incorrect?
it took you guys the year 2016 to REACTUALIZE all the false “prophecies” in your NT?

Just review my comments, CP, and you’ll see that I have already done so a number of times. As Dr. Seuss says, “If you read with your eyes shut you’re likely to find that the place where you’re going is far, far behind.”

CP, I am talking about multiple comments I addressed directly to you, not some random things I said somewhere in cyberspace, and if at this point you still cannot repeat back my arguments to me, it’s because you are not listening.

However, I am a generous soul, so I will refer you to them. Unfortunately, I will have to limit myself to two, because the comments don’t post multiple links.

“What you will find is evidence that often times prophecy is fulfilled in stages or types pointing to a ultimate fulfillment.”

so what you mean is that “immediately after the tribulation of those days” could be more than 1000 + year gap and “coming of the son of man” could mean after 1000000 years?
1 day is like 100,000 years in the sight of the lord?
if in next 50 years nothings happens and peace is restored in the middle east, then what interpretation will you give for jesus’ claim?

No, that is not what I mean.
If you would of googled Pella like I suggested, you’d found out that thousands of Christians believed the prophecy of Yeshua and fled Jerusalem to the mountains just like Yeshua had told them to do when they saw the armies around Jerusalem. They were accused of being traitors for being obedient to the message given by God through Yeshua. Similar to what happened when Jeremiah warned Jerusalem not to fight Babylon because they were being judged.

For the Jews that stayed, it was a awful tribulation resulting in the end of the world as they knew it.

Because history repeats itself, so does prophecy.

As for the times of the ultimate fulfillment; no one knows the day or the hour. This could be a veiled allusion to Yom Teruah, the next Feast to be fulfilled which is the only Holiday that falls on the 1st of a month, therefore know one knows exactly when. But we can know the seasons.

“If” it doesn’t happen in the next 50 years I guess I’ll die waiting for Messiah.

CP The whole Pella story is a fabrication – but for argument’s sake let’s accept it – How does this compare to Jeremiah’s situation? In Jeremiah those who listened to the prophet were blessed to remain within the community of Israel – those who obeyed Jesus got the worst punishment threatened by the Bible – to be cut off from God’s nation – the punishment designated for false prophets – Ezekiel 13:9

Hopefully, but perhaps not, they understood it in the same way we understand why Yeshua didn’t finish reading the Isaiah passage in synagogue:

“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me,
because the Lord has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor;
he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives,
and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor,”

This last part wasn’t read because it wasn’t time:

“and the day of vengeance of our God;”

This will happen as the Tanach says; when all the nations of the world form a alliance to take out Israel. Then the Messiah will come and take them out.

Myphariseefriend,
I don’t see how the context of Ezekiel 13:9 can possibly lend itself to a judgement of Yeshua.

Ezekiel 13:10
“‘This is because they have led my people astray saying, “All is well,” when things are not well……”

Ezekiel 13:22
…..and because you have encouraged the wicked person not to turn from his evil conduct and preserve his life.

*Yeshua, did not say “All is well” he said the opposite.
*Calling the wicked to repent was Yeshua’s signature line!

I given a lot of thought to your reasoning about Yeshua’s talmudim being cut off. Although your reason would be one of the first to come to mind, in the end it is a speculation. God may have had another reason such as seeding them among the lost tribes. After all, God has promised to bring the sticks back together.

R’B, I’m still not getting it.
What is so wrong with the teaching of Yeshua?
He pro Torah, Written and Oral, but against some things that were added.
He is not against religious leadership, just those individuals who have corrupted it.
He never claimed to be God, only His representative.
Those who have used his teaching for evil have twisted his teaching to do so.

Is the only reason a majority consensus? Isn’t that the kind thing that allows evil to be thought of as good and therefore subsequent judgement?

CP “Teaching” is not about saying words – it is about impacting lives – Yeshua had 2000 years to work with – the grand total is pathetic. And I never said that Ezekiel was talking about Yeshua directly – he was talking about the false prophets of his own generation – but the punishment he describes is exactly what happened to the followers of Yeshua – and this says something.

You are unbelievable… you accuse Dina of not answering you properly and then when she takes the time to find and post several places where she has done so, you say that is like a Mormon missionary. I find that very insulting, especially when Dina and several others in this forum have posted very solid arguments to which you have either ignored or responded with flimsy answers.

I went to everything she linked and read them. Most always I had already answered following her post. Check it out for yourself. She posts in the middle of existing threads making it appear things weren’t answered, it is all very confusing and IMHO misleading.

Please, CP, will you humor me and try to rephrase my arguments in your own words? I did not see that you answered my post, but that you dismissed them or replied with unsubstantiated assertions. I want to see if you really understand my position and that is why I ask you to do this. I am terribly busy today and will hopefully resume this conversation in a couple of days.

Pick one argument at a time, ONLY ONE AT A TIME and I will address it to the best of my ability. We may find the disagreement actually hinges on something deeper, if it does then we can BOTH agree to switch to that argument.

Don’t you think you and I would greatly benefit from a structured system of discussion?

If so please state one argument or copy and paste one thing I have not answered to your satisfaction and we will proceed in a orderly fashion.

CP, I will try to accommodate but super busy. You asked for reasons not to accept Jesus and I gave you many. If you have time, see if you can restate my reasons. I presented them in an organized way in at least some of the links. If you do not have the time, then I will choose one after the holiday.

Rabbi, my question would be, if G-d doesn’t expect perfection, why are his punishments so thorough and severe? Why did he flood the world (and kill everything,) only to have creation thrust back into chaos right after Noah leaves the ark?

Why does G-d demand that men, women, children, and even livestock should suffer death? If hashem doesn’t expect perfection, how can we possibly explain the death of babies? If G-d is not in need of our service, (but mitzvot are there for our benefit,) how can the punishments be so utterly severe?

Concerned Reader And do you understand this any better if God does demand perfection? What kind of perfection is He demanding from an infant? – The book of Job addresses this question – and while it may not be clear what God’s answer is – it certainly isn’t that He demands perfection. The following thought helps me deal with this question – God never owes anyone anything. If He gave an infant 2 days of life – that is an undeserved gift. When He takes that infant’s life He is not taking something that does not belong to Him. I do not see an infant’s death as a punishment for the infant. 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >

Psychologically its easier to digest (in the context of the Christian narrative of redemption,) though its true it may not aid our understanding.

If a monsoon wipes out innocents, we cannot impute motive, merely note an act of nature. However, if an agent (who claims to be a just judge) decides to kill a whole nation’s infants for the acts of its parents, the explanation that he requires perfection even at the slightest sin at least gives some sense of solace.

Like I said, I understand why you say it makes no sense, but its easier to digest, even if its a bad explanation.

Heathcliff wrote:
“What you will find is evidence that often times prophecy is fulfilled in stages or types pointing to a ultimate fulfillment.”

so what you mean is that “immediately after the tribulation of those days” could be more than 1000 + year gap and “coming of the son of man” could mean after 1000000 years?

THEN

Cp wrote:

“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me,
because the Lord has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor;
he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives,
and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor,”

This last part wasn’t read because it wasn’t time:

“and the day of vengeance of our God;”

So basically you just confirmed everything Heathcliff said. You can cut the end off mid-sentence and put that millenia into the future. The end wasn’t read because it would have shown he was taking the words out of context, which according to Gospel of Matthew, Jesus did on a regular basis.

Here is how what you posted looks:

Heathcliff: So you can cut the sentence into pieces and put contextual parts of it infinitely into the future?
CP: Absolutely not! But you can cut the sentence into pieces and put the contextual pieces infinitely into the future.

Also, did ANYTHING Jesus said in your quote actually happen? Can you prove it? Did broken hearts cease? Were captives let free? Did everyone in jail get out? John the Baptist sure didn’t. What “year of the Lord’s favor” was he referring to?

If a particular prophecy about Israel in Tanakh is not straight forward and requires some interpretation, you call that midrash.

If a particular prophecy about Yeshua is not straight forward and requires some interpretation, you call it out of context.

As for infinitely in the future; the point I was trying to make is just because something isn’t 100% fulfilled doesn’t mean it was a failure, nor does it mean it was completely fulfilled, (I thought that was obvious). The prophecy could be serving a dual purpose. So to answer from your perspective rather than mine, yes you are correct. Unless a specific time is given it is open ended except where another related passage may determine some set of parameters as to time. For example in Daniel where messiah must come before the destruction of the second temple. But it doesn’t say he must fulfill ALL things at that time.

The year of the Lords favor is possibly a Jubilee year, sure I could cite chapter and verse where Peter gets out of prison and a couple more. But that is not what the verse means. Rather it is a release from sin, guilt, shame and a over exaggerated binding oral law.

CP No – every prophecy has a straightforward meaning that is not “midrash” – the midrash needs to conform with the spirit of the plain meaning if it wants to be valid – and if someone claims fulfillment in the sense of “proof” he needs to be talking of the plain meaning because midrash can make anything mean everything 1000 Verses – a project of Judaism Resources wrote: >

My apologies to Rabbi B. for jumping in, but surely you know, CP, that read in context, the plain meaning refers to the people of Israel as a whole. The plain meaning is that we are hated, considered ugly (just look at depictions of Jews in art from the Middle Ages and onwards), and persecuted, killed for crimes we had not committed, and at the end of days we will be vindicated to the eyes of all nations, who will be completely baffled and astonished that they got us so wrong.

I highly recommend Rabbi Skobac’s YouTube videos on Isaiah 53. I think you will not only enjoy listening to him speak (he’s a great speaker) but you will also find it enlightening.

Thank you for the link.
Yes, I know of the plain reading of Isaiah 53, but taken as such is not without its problems. Putting that aside for now, why is there a problem with a son of Israel, representing Israel by manifesting in his own life the very trials his own people as a nation were enduring?

A second question is: Why can other Tanakh passages have duel meanings (as Talmud proves) but Isaiah 53 is limited to only one meaning?

CP, “Rather it is a release from sin, guilt, shame and a over exaggerated binding oral law.”

Really. So now you are saying you believe that Jesus came to release from sin, guilt and shame? How, if he was simply teaching Orthodox Torah, as you’ve averred many times here? And wasn’t the whole purpose of the sermon on the mount to “exaggerate” the Torah law, or replace it with Jesus’ own oral law, which was stricter than written Torah? According to Torah, sex with am married woman is sin. According to Jesus it is sin just to have a wrong thought, even if you overcome and do not commit any wrong-doing. And if his coming was to release his audience from the “exaggerated” oral law, why did he say to listen to the Pharisees and do everything they said, because they sit in Moses’ seat?

You see, CP, you need to stop bouncing between tracks here. Sometimes you resort to orthodox Christian dogma and apologetics. Sometimes you argue from the side of Pauline Christianity. Other times you deny it, just depending on which argument you want to make or defend. Be a Christian or don’t be a Christian. Believe the NT or don’t believe it. Believe Torah or don’t believe it. This idea of “I accept 45% of the NT and 75% of Tanakh” makes no sense. Neither book gives you that option because both claim to be 100% true. That claim is either true or it is not, thus the book is either true or not.

It is like your intermittent rejection/acceptance of Christian orthodoxy. The NT does not give you that option:

Galatians 1:6-9 “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

II Corinthians 2:3: “For if he that comes preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit, which you have not received, or another gospel, which you have not accepted, you might well bear with him.”

CP, “Rather it is a release from sin, guilt, shame and a over exaggerated binding oral law.”

***(Yeshua’s words and actions lead to repentance which is a release from the prison of sin, guilt, shame and a over exaggerated oral law.)

Really. So now you are saying you believe that Jesus came to release from sin, guilt and shame? How, if he was simply teaching Orthodox Torah, as you’ve averred many times here? And wasn’t the whole purpose of the sermon on the mount to “exaggerate” the Torah law, or replace it with Jesus’ own oral law, which was stricter than written Torah? According to Torah, sex with am married woman is sin. According to Jesus it is sin just to have a wrong thought, even if you overcome and do not commit any wrong-doing. And if his coming was to release his audience from the “exaggerated” oral law, why did he say to listen to the Pharisees and do everything they said, because they sit in Moses’ seat?

***(You yourself being human has surely wrestled with sin as the rest of us. So allow me to ask you which is easier; to have been fantasizing about a woman and then given a opportunity to live out that fantasy, then try to overcome the temptation, OR to have put even the thought of it out of your mind, then confronted with the opportunity you’ll likely run the other way.

Yeshua’s teaching on adultery provides a easier way to deal with sin and be victorious.

As to the Pharisees; IMHO, which is backed by the Shem Tov Matthew, Yeshua is saying to listen when Pharisees teach the Written Torah, but test the Oral Torah.)

You see, CP, you need to stop bouncing between tracks here. Sometimes you resort to orthodox Christian dogma and apologetics. Sometimes you argue from the side of Pauline Christianity. Other times you deny it, just depending on which argument you want to make or defend. Be a Christian or don’t be a Christian. Believe the NT or don’t believe it. Believe Torah or don’t believe it. This idea of “I accept 45% of the NT and 75% of Tanakh” makes no sense. Neither book gives you that option because both claim to be 100% true. That claim is either true or it is not, thus the book is either true or not.

***(what you refer to as “bouncing between the tracks” I refer to as seeking the truth without swallowing any position whole without first examining all aspects of it. You’re mistaken in assuming my position on the Tanakh. I believe the Tanakh to be 100% authoritative.)

It is like your intermittent rejection/acceptance of Christian orthodoxy. The NT does not give you that option:

*** (I do not take the NT as 100% authoritative therefore I do have that option.)

Galatians 1:6-9 “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

II Corinthians 2:3: “For if he that comes preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit, which you have not received, or another gospel, which you have not accepted, you might well bear with him.”

*** (I notice you quote Paul whom early Jewish followers of Yeshua believed to be a heritic and type of antichrist.)

Good luck!

*** (I don’t believe in the false goddess of luck, but thank you for the sentiment.)

I’m not familiar with lukan theology, but I agree “the blood and flesh opening of Jesus is not seen as a magical appeasing deity/atonement.”

It is repentance and obedience that appeases God. This is not to dismiss atonement, I don’t think atonement can be substituted for repentance and obedience, although I think atonement can lead people to repentance and obedience which makes the atonement effective.

“This is not to dismiss atonement, I don’t think atonement can be substituted for repentance and obedience, although I think atonement can lead people to repentance and obedience which makes the atonement effective”

the problem with your reply is that luke has dismissed atonement
there is no debt payment in lukes version
luke just wants the people to feel guilty over jesus’ murder, not that his body /life is an atonement for sins
once the people feel guilty, god forgives

@mr.heathcliff,
“this is the scholarly view which i am not making up.”

Yes, I believe you. In our short time of discussion I’ve found you to be intellectually honest and a man of integrity.

As to the lukan doctrine you’ve stated above; there is nothing which I disagree with. I am very wary of the plethora of christian doctrines concerning atonement and prefer to study such a doctrine only from the Tanakh and Talmuds. Although I don’t disagree with the lukan doctrine, I also see in Judaism a doctrine which closely resembles the lukan doctrine but goes deeper into sacrificial atonement of the righteous for the unrighteous as redemption. Again this is not magical, but something that should lead to repentance.

IMHO, that is what the sacrificial system is all about. Anyone with a conscience looking at a dead burning animal should say to themselves; “if it wasn’t for the grace of God that should be me”. This “should” affect a person with the seriousness of sin and the multitude mercies of God leading them to repentance. Without repentance any sacrifice, animal or the righteous, means nothing except as sign of hypocrisy.

My best friend was in the war, his platoon was evacuated in three helicopters, he was kicked off the first two because they were over weight. He took the last one out. The first two were shot down, everyone died. This has effected him immensely. Although his friends may not of been “righteous” nevertheless he felt it should of been him. This has led him to live a better life. So Yeshua’s self sacrifice to obedience to God resulting in his death should effect us immensely. Especially when because of our disobedience we are the ones who deserve such a death.

“luke know that his source mark is dependant on isaiah 53. luke is not seeing atonement for sins in isaiah 53, so he interprets isaiah 53 differently than mark. is this a possibility?”

Yes, Luke dependent on Mark is the theory. But I see Luke more as a reporter drawing from many sources which we no longer have. It is interesting because of his relation to Paul, that he above all people should be associated with this view. Perhaps Luke had written his Gospel and sent it off before meeting Paul?

Another possibility is some of the gospels where edited before 200ad. We know for a fact there was editing after, so why not before? I am very wary of the influence Constantine may of had in putting the NT together. My appreciation for the NT cannot be over estimated, however I believe a certain amount of textual, cultural and era criticisms must be applied. The first principle I use is: ‘does it agree with Torah?’

Therefore any acceptable models of atonement must first be modeled or spoken of in the Tanakh which brings us to Isaiah 53. But it also brings us to the story of Joseph being left for dead and sold into slavery. It is interesting that the sins of his brothers and the suffering of Joseph ultimately resulted in their salvation.

To respond to your video; What do you think would happen if I went to a isolated tribe in the rain forest, gathered up 18 of them, placed them strategically around a diamond shaped with four big flat rocks. Had one throw a ball to me which I hit with a stick. Would they know what to do?

No! They have no reference. It is Judaism that supply’s the reference for ransom, redemption, sacrifice and repentance and forgiveness.
Those people don’t know what they worship, salvation is from the Jews.

CP wrote: “You yourself being human has surely wrestled with sin as the rest of us. So allow me to ask you which is easier; to have been fantasizing about a woman and then given a opportunity to live out that fantasy, then try to overcome the temptation, OR to have put even the thought of it out of your mind, then confronted with the opportunity you’ll likely run the other way.”

Please don’t impute to Judaism the idea that sexual fantasy is okay. Why assume the NT is correct in presenting Jesus as brilliant for coming up with the idea of overcoming that sin? It’s utterly false, as I will show you.

In Matthew 5:27-28, Jesus says: You have heard that it was said, Do not commit adultery. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Again, Jesus contrasts the Torah teaching not to commit adultery with a supposedly new
one: “But I tell you” and so on. It’s pretty amazing. Deuteronomy 5:17: You shall not commit
adultery. A few verses later, Deuteronomy 5:18: You shall not covet your fellow’s wife. The NT could only get away with this because its gentile audience was so ignorant they didn’t know the Ten Commandments. Or perhaps people like you were so enamored with him that you didn’t bother to check that lusting after another’s wife is also forbidden.

See also:

Job 31:1: I made a covenant with my eyes, and why should I gaze upon a virgin?

Numbers 15:39: This shall be fringes for you, and when you see it, you will remember all the commandments of the Lord to perform them, and you shall not wander after your hearts and after your eyes after which you are going astray.

@Dina,
Since I’m not Orthodox, and there is very very few Jews here, I’m just going to live in my horse trailer or perhaps pitch a tent. It’s supposed to rain Monday.

I don’t consider myself righteous, so it would be difficult to talk to you in a spirit of self-righteousness. I don’t mean to talk down to you, it is just frustrating when you vacillate between extremes using such positions as proof of a issue that is non-existent in the extremes.

Dina, you asked;
“…..if all he did was teach what the Torah and the rabbis teach, how is he superior?”
&
“Give me one good reason why you choose him over traditional Judaism.”

Keep in mind you are asking for ‘MY’ reason.

From everything I’ve studied, I believe Yeshua to be the one Moses said would come. If I am to be consistent with this belief then as the Torah and the Rabbis teach I am supposed to listen to him. Yeshua said his teaching is easy, and when compared to keeping Torah by the direction of the Talmud, Yeshua’s teaching is so much easier and makes much more sense. It is similar to Hillel who used love of God and love of fellow man as the guiding principle of Torah observance.

In addition, how can I deny the transforming work of the promised Spirit. How can I deny the Spirit living inside of me. I’m sure you think of this as fanciful imaginations, however even though I can assure you it is real. I realize you have no frame of reference to actually judge this so we are regulated to discuss Scripture and world events.

But you must realize my experience and study is a synergistic force in my life. Just for the sake of discussion, I wonder how you would fair if you lived 200 miles away from the closest Orthodox Jew? Where I live it is not easy to be observant, even by my Rabbi’s standards! I know you reject my Rabbi and therefore reject me. I must admit it saddens me some, but I do the best I can with what God has given me.

Those are my reasons. It is not as if I don’t question. One doesn’t always feel the Spirit, thereby giving opportunity to question ones faith. However I feel I’m being guided to find out why I should reject Yeshua. By questioning my belief system there have been a number of things culled out. For a while I wondered where it was going to stop! But believing the Spirit guides to all truth I have to be willing to go where he takes me, give up what is false and embrace what is true whatever it may be. Since I believe the Spirit will never contradict Torah I feel I’m protected by both from being led astray, therefore I can be open to other views.

Bottom line is I’ve experienced Yeshua. I see nothing in Tanakh saying this must be a false experience and wondering if you all knew of anything?

God forbid I should reject you for your belief. I have spent the last few days trying to put myself in your shoes. I think you are in a difficult position and I do have some sympathy for it. I do understand that your experience is real to you. I’m not you, and therefore, it’s not my place to judge you or to judge your reactions to your life experiences.

But herein lies the difficulty. Once someone has a powerful spiritual/emotional experience such as yours, then all the evidence in the world will not sway him because, as you said, you cannot deny your experience. I know what this means because I cannot deny my own spiritual experiences and I know it would be hard for me to accept that they are based on falsehood if I were presented with such evidence.

Do you think it’s possible to fall in love with the wrong religious leader? There are people in other religions who have deep spiritual experiences that are every bit as real as yours. What would you say to them? Some of them are Muslims, some are Buddhists, some are Hindus, some are Catholics, some are Orthodox Jews. All of their respective religions contradict each other. Can all these religions be true? Are all these experiences true? They certainly cannot be denied. You know this and I know this because we both experienced it.

In short, what I’m asking is: can an undeniable and powerful experience of a God or Godlike leader be used as a measure of truth? I know you say you use your experience together with study, but is this not going to make it impossible to sort out the truth from your biases?

When I was in my early twenties, I experienced a brief period of turmoil. It occurred to me then, quite suddenly, married as I was with one child and another on the way, that I may be an Orthodox Jew simply because I was raised that way. This caused me no end of consternation! I had to find out if I could really defend my faith. I worried that my extremely positive experience of Judaism (joyful, warm, uplifting, ennobling) would cause me to search for confirmation rather than the truth (a problem known as confirmation bias). Ultimately, I had to humbly acknowledge my biases and hope for the best. I could not assume that my study was spirit-guided because then I would have had to assume that my conclusions were a priori correct (after all, the spirit wouldn’t lead me wrong, right?). (Such a thought would not have occurred to me anyway because it’s not a Jewish style of thinking.)

Does it not trouble you that the only reason you can give for your acceptance of Jesus is a spiritual/emotional experience? That the only reason you believe he is the one sent by God is because of a feeling?

It is not possible, I think, for a Jew to practice Judaism without a community. Judaism is a family-centered and community-centered religion. An Orthodox Jew who finds himself alone would have had to arrive there under extreme duress (like, I don’t know, captured and sold as a slave or something). Or it would be a temporary situation (he has to work somewhere for a year). Hillel taught, “Do not separate yourself from the community” (Ethics of the Fathers 2:5). (In the same mishna he taught, “Do not believe in yourself until the day you die and don’t judge your friend until you have reached his place,” interesting in light of the fact that this post touches on these two concepts.)

You wrote, “it is just frustrating when you vacillate between extremes using such positions as proof of a issue that is non-existent in the extremes.” I may have many flaws–and God knows, do I have them!–but one thing that you cannot say about me is that I present unsubstantiated assertions. I back up everything I say with Scriptural citations and primary and secondary historical sources where needed. I have studied the issues (although I still have a long way to go), and I have read many books of history of both religions as well as the history of the interactions between the two.

What I find frustrating is that you often make statements without supporting them, and the above quote is a prime example (you see, here I am substantiating an accusation). It would be so helpful if you would give an example of my vacillation between two extremes “using such positions as proof of a issue that is non-existent in the extremes” (I don’t even know what this means). It’s my job to seek the truth, and if you can show me where I go wrong, I can learn to correct myself. Or perhaps you will give me an opportunity to clarify my position. Or perhaps you may be accusing me unfairly, in which case you will need to apologize. Whatever the case is, substantiate, substantiate, substantiate. Please, I implore you. I know this discussion will begin to bear fruit if you do.

In this vein, I respectfully request that you provide evidence that I have gone on a hateful rant regarding Christian-Jewish relations (implying that my information was fabricated) and that I have falsified history regarding my counter to your assertion that the Pharisees were corrupt. You charged me of this misconduct previously without showing how that was the case.

To your last question, on Friday I posted 7 links to comments that I had addressed directly to you to help you understand why your belief in Jesus is untenable for Jews. Do you think you can restate my arguments in your own words? I find sometimes that restating the argument of someone I disagree with helps me to see if I actually understood it. If I can’t restate it properly, then I know I didn’t understand it.

“So Yeshua’s self sacrifice to obedience to God resulting in his death should effect us immensely. Especially when because of our disobedience we are the ones who deserve such a death.”

do the deaths of children all around the world effect you immediately or do you need to imagine your burnt offering before you talk with your god?

the suicide of your yeshua makes no sense

he thought he would willingly take revenge on those who did not follow him
verses 25:31-46

so your yeshua could willingly get killed, then come back and willingly do the killing.

Diogenes Laetius

They tell us that the wise man will for reasonable cause make his own exit from life, on his country’s behalf or for the sake of his friends or if suffer intolerable pain, mutilation, or incurable disease

self sacrifice seems to be a form of self abuse and both yeshua and Diogenes seem to be loving this act. you need to remember this self abuse to “connect” with your god and increase your guilt levels. makes no sense to me.

but the question is, did the historical jesus think of this?

i quote:

Well the Gospels are apologetics for the crucifixion, so they do not, in themselves, have overt clues that Jesus did *not* predict his own death. They are attempts at explanations after the fact. The reasons it is thought to be unlikely that Jesus predicted his own death and resurrection (aside from the fact that most sane people do not intentionally seek out one of the most brutal and agonizing forms of execution in history) is that there was no pre-Christian expectation that the Messiah was supposed to do that. It would have made no sense within the religious or historical context of Jesus and the disciples for a Messianic aspirant to say he would die. The notion of a Messiah dying for people’s sins was a Christian redefinition of the Messiah built around a need to explain the crucifixion

People see things different. Some people dismiss the spiritual world. Perhaps you see the holocaust a result of living in a evil anti-Semitic world. Or more specifically the result of Luther’s anti-Semitic words being used by Hitler. I would not disagree with you except I see more; I see in the spiritual realm a connection between the horrific deaths of 6 million and the renewed State of Israel. Even how the events of the physical world played out afterward hint at this.

You may not see things the same way and why should you? You are you and I am me, we see things different. In the same way I see in Yeshua a connection in the spiritual realm. He came at the right time, just before the end of Israel for 2000 years. His death was timely on Passover, rose on First Fruits, and the Spirit he promised was given on Shavuot. His message has been gathering the exiles even today. And there is prophecy for the Fall Feasts yet to be fulfilled.

Sure there’s more, lots more, but I’m not here to proselytize. I just don’t see how the real historical Yeshua is said to be incompatible with Judaism. To me he is the greatest Rabbi to ever live!

Dina, the point is the words are from Tanach and therefore true, yet anyone believing them is not accused of idolatry; making wisdom an idol.

Yeshua said to come to him. He claimed a message from God and the correct interpretation of Torah leading to life and some say he calls people to idolatery. That is just as absurd as saying wisdom calls people to idolatry.

Edward: We believe God is 1, but is a Spirit. The Father gave his spirit to Moses. He also came down to distribute his spirit with the 70 elders. Could the Father have gave his Yeshua his Spirit, but also Came down to earth?

cflat7:
(Share)
And the LORD came down in the cloud, and spoke unto him, and (took of the spirit that was upon him), and put it upon the seventy elders; and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, but they did so no more.

There is a big problem with ‘timing’ using that verse for what you want cause you forgot:
וְהָיָה אַֽחֲרֵי־כֵן
“After all of this I will pour out my Spirit on all kinds of people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy. Your elderly will have revelatory dreams; your young men will see prophetic visions.”

So you gotta ask yourself; “After all what?”
The answer is in the preceding 27 verses.

Now I don’t deny there was a outpouring of the Holy Spirit, but I see it as a taste of a ultimate fulfillment, just as Moses and the Elders was.
For example; Joel says God will pour His Spirit on all mankind which was about 70 nations directly after Babel and God pours His Spirit on 70 elders

“In the same way I see in Yeshua a connection in the spiritual realm. He came at the right time, just before the end of Israel for 2000 years. His death was timely on Passover, rose on First Fruits, and the Spirit he promised was given on Shavuot. His message has been gathering the exiles even today. And there is prophecy for the Fall Feasts yet to be fulfilled.”

but the Jews say that God and neither human needs to wear jesus glasses to seek Gods forgiveness.

what are you talking about? why did you quote luke? “in his name…”
why in the name of finite created jewish guy? what is great about his name? many jews were named greater names than his name
what is in a name?

“The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things.”

where is that in the torah that name of messiah is needed for repentance and forgiveness?
i thought all this time God said to call out to Him

Even (for the sake of arguement) let’s say God was some sort of complex unity. Do you think God would tell us something like He is one but three persons? With mankind’s propensity to polytheism and idol worship it would be the equivalent of giving a razor blade box cutter to a toddler!

Edward,
I tell you this because I want you to know this comes from one who believes Yeshua is anointed by Hashem for a particular work.

Sure there are those who believe things in direct contradiction to Torah, but this phenomenon is not peculiar to Christianity, it is also found in the Talmud, it is found everywhere!

The point isn’t ‘what religion is right’ the point is ‘What is the Truth’.

And the Truth must agree with Torah.

I may not have 100% truth but I’m working hard on it. Therefore I challenge you to prove that a correct view of Yeshua as a messiah is in direct conflict with the Tanach.

The more I study, the longer I ask, the more I read, I’m thinking it can’t be done. I’ve read the anti-missionary sites and found many truths that have helped me gain a more correct understanding. But equally found out right errors strategically placed to bolster a predetermined view of Scripture!

I just want the truth. If you have something of substance I am more than open, in fact I’d be very excited to here it. I’ve grown weary of the same old skewed tag lines. Give me something REAL, something TRUE that cannot be intellectually honestly refuted!

With such a entrenched position of some, you’d think there’d be some real indisputable evidence.

Sadly that seems to be the least important thing in all forms of religion.

Amen, Amen, my Phariseefriend!
“If someone looks to God and to God alone for compassion then that is where God’s compassion will be found”

God alone is the object of our repentance. Didn’t the Pharisee Paul also preach the message?
When he summarized what he had done in his ministry to the diaspora Jewish communities and gentiles, he clearly confessed that he “testified to Jews and Greeks repentance to God and faith in our lord Jesus Christ.” ( Acts 20:21).

Notice how Paul indicated the object of repentace. It is TO GOD.
I guess Paul also distinguished his main message to the Jews from main message to the Greeks.
What was his primary message to the Jews? It was repentance to God, and the main message to the Greeks? Faith in our lord Jesus Christ.